Research article

CFD investigation on the maximum lift coefficient degradation of rough airfoils

  • Received: 27 November 2020 Accepted: 07 February 2021 Published: 03 March 2021
  • Ice accretion can reduce the performance of aircraft's wings, which results in higher fuel consumption and risk of accidents. Experiments proved that even in its very earlier stages (increased roughness), icing could cause a reduction of 25% in the maximum lift, and an increase of 90% in drag of an aspect ratio 6 wing. In this work, we propose a correlation to predict the degradation of the maximum lift coefficient caused by roughness effects on flows over two airfoils, a NACA 0012 and a model 5–6. In addition, a second correlation is proposed to find the minimum Reynolds number that are useful for higher Reynolds number applications when roughness is considered. The SA roughness extension is implemented into an open-source code called SU2. The verification and validation of the implementation is performed in two steps. First, the behavior of the flow over a smooth NACA 0012 is investigated to confirm whether the implementation has no influence on the original model when roughness is not activated. Then, roughness is activated, and estimations of lift coefficients and velocity profiles inside the boundary layer are evaluated and compared to numerical and experimental results. Finally, investigations on the maximum lift coefficient reduction caused by different equivalent sand grain roughness heights and Reynolds numbers are performed. Our results demonstrated that, for the equivalent sand grain roughness heights investigated, the variation of sufficiently small heights has no significant influence on the maximum lift coefficient degradation. Moreover, when roughness is continuously increased, a saturation point seems to be approached, in which the variation of the maximum lift coefficient degradation is reduced. We noticed that although the reduction of the maximum lift coefficient caused by different equivalent sand-grain roughness heights and Reynolds number present similar behavior, they fall into different curve formats.

    Citation: Gitsuzo B.S. Tagawa, François Morency, Héloïse Beaugendre. CFD investigation on the maximum lift coefficient degradation of rough airfoils[J]. AIMS Energy, 2021, 9(2): 305-325. doi: 10.3934/energy.2021016

    Related Papers:

  • Ice accretion can reduce the performance of aircraft's wings, which results in higher fuel consumption and risk of accidents. Experiments proved that even in its very earlier stages (increased roughness), icing could cause a reduction of 25% in the maximum lift, and an increase of 90% in drag of an aspect ratio 6 wing. In this work, we propose a correlation to predict the degradation of the maximum lift coefficient caused by roughness effects on flows over two airfoils, a NACA 0012 and a model 5–6. In addition, a second correlation is proposed to find the minimum Reynolds number that are useful for higher Reynolds number applications when roughness is considered. The SA roughness extension is implemented into an open-source code called SU2. The verification and validation of the implementation is performed in two steps. First, the behavior of the flow over a smooth NACA 0012 is investigated to confirm whether the implementation has no influence on the original model when roughness is not activated. Then, roughness is activated, and estimations of lift coefficients and velocity profiles inside the boundary layer are evaluated and compared to numerical and experimental results. Finally, investigations on the maximum lift coefficient reduction caused by different equivalent sand grain roughness heights and Reynolds numbers are performed. Our results demonstrated that, for the equivalent sand grain roughness heights investigated, the variation of sufficiently small heights has no significant influence on the maximum lift coefficient degradation. Moreover, when roughness is continuously increased, a saturation point seems to be approached, in which the variation of the maximum lift coefficient degradation is reduced. We noticed that although the reduction of the maximum lift coefficient caused by different equivalent sand-grain roughness heights and Reynolds number present similar behavior, they fall into different curve formats.



    加载中


    [1] Gulick BG (1938) Effects of a simulated ice formation on the aerodynamic characteristics of an airfoil (NACA-WR-L-292). NTRS-NASA technical reports server. Available from: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19930093051.
    [2] Beierle MT (1999) Investigation of effects of surface roughness on symmetric airfoil lift and lift-to-drag ratio. University of maryland-college park, defense technical information center. Available from: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a360065.pdf.
    [3] Cao Y, Wu Z, Su Y, et al. (2015) Aircraft flight characteristics in icing conditions. Prog Aerosp Sci 74: 62-80. doi: 10.1016/j.paerosci.2014.12.001
    [4] Beaugendre H, Morency F, Habashi WG, et al. (2003) Roughness implementation in FENSAP-ICE: Model calibration and influence on ice shapes. J Aircr 40: 1212-1215. doi: 10.2514/2.7214
    [5] deVelder NB (2020) Rough airfoil simulation for wind turbine applications. University of massachusetts amherst. Available from: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_2/1820/.
    [6] Aupoix B (2015b) Roughness corrections for the k-ω shear stress transport model: Status and proposals. J Fluids Eng 137. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4028122.
    [7] Schlichting H (1937) Experimental investigation of the problem of surface roughness (NACA-TM-823). Available from: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19930094593.
    [8] Dirling JR (1973) A method for computing roughwall heat transfer rates on reentry nosetips. Paper presented at the 8th thermophysics conference, fluid dynamics and co-located conferences, palm springs, CA, U.S.A. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1973-763.
    [9] Liu S (2014) Simulation of transition and roughness effects on micro air vehicle aerodynamics. University of Sheffield. Available from: http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/id/eprint/7757.
    [10] Aupoix B, Spalart P (2003) Extensions of the spalart-allmaras turbulence model to account for wall roughness. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 24: 454-462. doi: 10.1016/S0142-727X(03)00043-2
    [11] Patel V (1998) Perspective: flow at high reynolds number and over rough surfaces-Achilles heel of CFD. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2820682.
    [12] Lynch FT, Khodadoust A (2001) Effects of ice accretions on aircraft aerodynamics. Prog Aerosp Sci 37: 669-767. doi: 10.1016/S0376-0421(01)00018-5
    [13] Brumby RE (1979) Wing surface roughness: Cause and effect. DC Flight Approach 32: 2-7.
    [14] Jackson DG (1999) Effect of simulated ice and residual ice roughness on the performance of a natural laminar flow airfoil. University of illinois at urbana-champaign. Available from: http://icing.ae.illinois.edu/papers/00/darren%20jackson%20dissertation.html.
    [15] Pope SB (2000) Turbulent flows. Cambridge: Cambridge university press.
    [16] Blazek J (2015) Computational fluid dynamics: principles and applications (Third ed.): Elsevier Ltd.
    [17] Palacios F, Colonno MR, Aranake AC, et al. (2013). Stanford university unstructured (SU2): An open-source integrated computational environment for multi-physics simulation and design. Paper presented at the 51st AIAA aerospace sciences meeting including the new horizons forum and aerospace exposition 2013, Grapevine, TX, United states. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2013-287.
    [18] Spalart P, Allmaras S (1992) A one-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic flows. Paper presented at the 30th aerospace sciences meeting and exhibit. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1992-439.
    [19] Nikuradse J (1933) Laws of flow in rough pipes. National advisory committee for aeronautics washington.
    [20] Molina E, Spode C, Annes da Silva RG, et al. (2017) Hybrid rans/les calculations in su2. Paper presented at the 23rd AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2017-4284.
    [21] White FM, Corfield I (2006) Viscous fluid flow (Vol. 3). McGraw-hill New York.
    [22] Jespersen DC, Pulliam TH, Childs ML (2016) Overflow turbulence modeling resource validation results (20190000252) NTRS-NASA technical reports server: NASA. Available from: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20190000252.
    [23] Langel CM, Chow R, Van Dam C, et al. (2017) RANS based methodology for predicting the influence of leading edge erosion on airfoil performance. Sandia national lab.(SNL-NM), Albuquerque, NM (United States). Available from: https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1404827-rans-based-methodology-predicting-influence-leading-edge-erosion-airfoil-performance.
    [24] Mendez B, Muñoz A, Munduate X (2015) Study of distributed roughness effect over wind turbine airfoils performance using CFD. Paper presented at the 33rd wind energy symposium, Kissimmee, Florida. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2015-0994.
    [25] Gregory N, O'Reilly CL (1970) Low-speed aerodynamic characteristics of NACA0012 aerofoil section, including the effects of uppe-surface roughness simulating hoar frost. (3726). CiteSeerX. Available from: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.227.696&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
    [26] Kerho MF, Bragg MB (1997) Airfoil boundary-layer development and transition with large leading-edge roughness. AIAA J 35: 75-84. doi: 10.2514/2.65
    [27] Ladson CL (1988) Effects of independent variation of mach and reynolds numbers on the low-speed aerodynamic characteristics of the NACA 0012 airfoil section (NASA-TM-4074). NTRS-NASA technical reports server. Available from: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19880019495.
    [28] Rumsey C, Smith B, Huang G (2018) Turbulence modeling resource website. Available from: http://turbmodels.larc.nasa.gov.
    [29] Abbott IH, Von Doenhoff AE, Stivers Jr L (1945) Summary of airfoil data (NACA-TR-824). Office of Aeronautical Intelligence, Washington, DC, United States. Available from: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19930090976.
    [30] Hellsten A, Laine S (1998) Extension of k-W shear-stress transport turbulence model for rough-wall flows. AIAA J 36: 1728-1729. doi: 10.2514/2.7543
    [31] Knopp T, Eisfeld B, Calvo JB (2009) A new extension for k-ω turbulence models to account for wall roughness. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 30: 54-65. doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2008.09.009
    [32] Bragg MB, Broeren AP, Blumenthal LA (2005) Iced-airfoil aerodynamics. Progress Aerosp Sci 41: 323-362. doi: 10.1016/j.paerosci.2005.07.001
    [33] GARTEUR Action group AG-32 (2003) Prediction of performance degradation due to icing for 2D configurations. Final report of GARTEUR AG-32. July, 2003.
    [34] Tagawa GBS, Morency F, Beaugendre H (2018) CFD study of airfoil lift reduction caused by ice roughness. Paper presented at the 2018 applied aerodynamics conference. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2018-3010.
    [35] Kays WM, Crawford ME (1980) Convective heat and mass transfer, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2021 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(3158) PDF downloads(210) Cited by(1)

Article outline

Figures and Tables

Figures(16)  /  Tables(2)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog